[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <CA+55aFwV=mO4NjJ2nqOsme7Pg_Lno7hPO6o+ahf-qSpunm9scA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 1 Oct 2017 16:15:07 -0700
From: Linus Torvalds <torvalds@...ux-foundation.org>
To: Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com>
Cc: Mimi Zohar <zohar@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
"Eric W. Biederman" <ebiederm@...ssion.com>,
LSM List <linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-fsdevel <linux-fsdevel@...r.kernel.org>,
Christoph Hellwig <hch@...radead.org>,
"Theodore Ts'o" <tytso@....edu>, Jan Kara <jack@...e.cz>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
linux-integrity@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [RFC PATCH 3/3] fs: detect that the i_rwsem has already been
taken exclusively
On Sun, Oct 1, 2017 at 3:34 PM, Dave Chinner <david@...morbit.com> wrote:
>
> We already have a change counter on the inode, which is modified on
> any data or metadata write (i_version) under filesystem locks. The
> i_version counter has well defined semantics - it's required by
> NFSv4 to increment on any metadata or data change - so we should be
> able to rely on it's behaviour to implement IMA as well.
I actually think i_version has exactly the wrong semantics.
Afaik, it doesn't actually version the file _data_ at all, it only
versions "inode itself changed".
But I might have missed something obvious. The updates are hidden in
some odd places sometimes.
Linus
Powered by blists - more mailing lists